Welcome to MacTalk Australia

the largest Australian community for Apple discussions and topics

Join the discussions, Register Now!
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 201
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    333

    Default

    Not sure if it's the same controller. Can someone else verify?

    ... but then again, this one wasn't meant to work.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    So.... Jedda.....

    care to weigh in at this stage about the memory interconnects and northside IC and their inability to take more than 4Gb?

    So what is the REAL memory limit of the chipset?

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    333

    Default

    Oh, and system wakes from sleep fine, too. Just in case anyone wonders.

  4. #44

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sellicks Beach, SA
    Posts
    3,537

    Default

    I'm intrigued as to this will work out now. This guy here: Keith Combs' Blahg : Pity OS X doesn?t like 8GB of memory in my MacBook Pro tried this a couple of months ago with VMs (on the same hardware) and got into all sorts of strife. He also made a point that it is one thing for the hardware to think it has all that RAM and being able to utilise all of it. His observation was that "Once it gets to 4GB (OS X) it wanders off into the weeds".

    I'm looking forward to updates.

    PS. good work on experimenting safely and sharing it with us.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    333

    Default



    A little more testing, after giving VMWare 4GB of RAM.
    MacBookPro Penryn 15" | 2.5GHZ | 200GB 7200RPM HDD | 6GB RAM (see here)
    PowerBook G4 12" | 1.33GHZ | 160GB 5400RPM HDD | 768MB RAM
    (also a g3 lombard, g3 wallstreet pictureframe, 3400, 180c, 160)

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    737

    Default

    kernel_task using 16,777,216.00 TB of Virtual Memory hey

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    454

    Default

    Oh Jesus. You went and did it.

    Whilst the system will seem to load 6GB, or even 8GB, it cannot actively address it. Whilst to the naked eye, it appears to, it cannot swap any bits in and out of the addresses.

    Keep your system on over the next few days. Your virtual memory usage will start to eat drive space, and you will notice massive slowdowns until you reboot.

    In short - listen to me.

    What amazes me is that you guys are digging it up, like its a new discovery. I give MacTalk a lot of credit, but if the current MacBook Pro is out 6 months, and MacTalk breaks a REAL story about physical memory limits being broken, i'll eat my computer - part by part.
    Service Manager - Streetwise
    Developer - Ration

  9. #49

    Default

    Um,

    I have used Mac Pros with 8 Gb + of Ram and MacOSX rocks with more than 4gb of Ram. I think there is a problem with 4gb and MBPs, not 4gb and MacOSX.

    The way MacOSX works is each process is allocated its own 4gb of address space (unless it is 64bit), and the OS allocates chunks of memory for each process. This is the way the Mac OSX can run 64 bit apps on a 32 bit OS and why the Mac transition to 64 bit will be practically seamless.

    BTW the OS will probably start running into 64 bit issues when we get 4gb or greater video cards.
    Luke Tupper - MacOSX Developer
    Black Bilby
    Duplicate Image Detector

  10. #50
    astr0b0y Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jedda View Post
    ... if the current MacBook Pro is out 6 months, and MacTalk breaks a REAL story about physical memory limits being broken, i'll eat my computer - part by part.
    And I'll eat the resulting turd.

  11. #51

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sellicks Beach, SA
    Posts
    3,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jedda View Post
    Oh Jesus. You went and did it.

    Whilst the system will seem to load 6GB, or even 8GB, it cannot actively address it. Whilst to the naked eye, it appears to, it cannot swap any bits in and out of the addresses.

    Keep your system on over the next few days. Your virtual memory usage will start to eat drive space, and you will notice massive slowdowns until you reboot.

    In short - listen to me.
    Listen bloke. Lots of people will listen, but if you make a pronouncement without references? Well, that makes it substantially less than conclusive. So when further test results come back that are a lot less than positive you come out with something that reads like : "In future, listen to me me for am the word of God". You have to see that won't be effective either?

    You didn't name the memory controller chipset model in your OP which meant I had to spend 30 odd minutes learning a very few things (reading a pile of irrelevant stuff) in order to finally find some guys blog post where he explains his similar experiment, its conclusions (failure) and whatnot. And I still don't know what memory controller is used.

  12. #52

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    333

    Default

    Xbench: Comparison

    XBench testing WITH 5GB of ram in use from VMWare at the time. Memory allocation is faster than compared machine.

    x-2:vm gm$ du -h /var/vm
    64M /var/vm

    PhysMem: 2840M wired, 2189M active, 206M inactive, 5246M used, 898M free.
    MacBookPro Penryn 15" | 2.5GHZ | 200GB 7200RPM HDD | 6GB RAM (see here)
    PowerBook G4 12" | 1.33GHZ | 160GB 5400RPM HDD | 768MB RAM
    (also a g3 lombard, g3 wallstreet pictureframe, 3400, 180c, 160)

  13. #53

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kim jong il View Post
    Listen bloke. Lots of people will listen, but if you make a pronouncement without references? Well, that makes it substantially less than conclusive. So when further test results come back that are a lot less than positive you come out with something that reads like : "In future, listen to me me for am the word of God". You have to see that won't be effective either?

    You didn't name the memory controller chipset model in your OP which meant I had to spend 30 odd minutes learning a very few things (reading a pile of irrelevant stuff) in order to finally find some guys blog post where he explains his similar experiment, its conclusions (failure) and whatnot. And I still don't know what memory controller is used.
    Kim,

    Calm down brother! Most people on this forum know of my line of work and position, and therefore trust my opinion, and technical references. A lot of the information that I have available to me is not necessarily available to the public.

    I would never purport to have the word of god, but if I walk into a fruit shop, and the guy tells me that mangos are shit hot at the moment, i'll probably buy one.
    Service Manager - Streetwise
    Developer - Ration

  14. #54

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    333

    Default

    System is still running at full speed, it's not thrashing like it would be if it was overusing the RAM. I'm playing with FL Studio in the Windows XP VM, the sound isn't even skipping.
    MacBookPro Penryn 15" | 2.5GHZ | 200GB 7200RPM HDD | 6GB RAM (see here)
    PowerBook G4 12" | 1.33GHZ | 160GB 5400RPM HDD | 768MB RAM
    (also a g3 lombard, g3 wallstreet pictureframe, 3400, 180c, 160)

  15. #55

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tupps View Post
    I have used Mac Pros with 8 Gb + of Ram and MacOSX rocks with more than 4gb of Ram. I think there is a problem with 4gb and MBPs, not 4gb and MacOSX.
    Yep, there are G5s in the office with 10GB of RAM running just fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by tupps View Post
    BTW the OS will probably start running into 64 bit issues when we get 4gb or greater video cards.
    But by then, Snow Leopard, which is fully 64-bit, will be out.
    MacBookPro Penryn 15" | 2.5GHZ | 200GB 7200RPM HDD | 6GB RAM (see here)
    PowerBook G4 12" | 1.33GHZ | 160GB 5400RPM HDD | 768MB RAM
    (also a g3 lombard, g3 wallstreet pictureframe, 3400, 180c, 160)

  16. #56

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    333

    Default

    Right, I've now quit VMWare and "Used" has come down to 1.37GB. So the memory didn't get lost.

    x-2:vm gm$ du -h /var/vm
    64M /var/vm

    No swap.

    963893(0) pageins, 0(0) pageouts

    (it's been rebooted once since last time, unrelated to any errors)

    No pageouts. Nothing has been paged out to disk even though I've had two VMs running, one with 3.5GB of RAM allocated, and one with 512MB allocated, and have had XBench running. That should surely push me over 4GB shouldn't it?

    Xbench: Comparison

    Which seems to think that my memory speeds are about right. So with 5GB used, it's clearly not using disk as RAM.
    MacBookPro Penryn 15" | 2.5GHZ | 200GB 7200RPM HDD | 6GB RAM (see here)
    PowerBook G4 12" | 1.33GHZ | 160GB 5400RPM HDD | 768MB RAM
    (also a g3 lombard, g3 wallstreet pictureframe, 3400, 180c, 160)

  17. #57

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sellicks Beach, SA
    Posts
    3,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jedda View Post
    ... I would never purport to have the word of god, but if I walk into a fruit shop, and the guy tells me that mangos are shit hot at the moment, i'll probably buy one.
    I'll cop the slap on that one. I know what you do and that was a very nice analogy. However, chipsets types aren't exactly a secret and if you know the type I'd love to know what it is so I can read the white paper. It allows me to actually know what it does rather than just accept it from a third party. Sometimes being right isn't as rewarding as educating people.

    Cheers.

  18. #58

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    333

    Default



    This is the controversial module
    MacBookPro Penryn 15" | 2.5GHZ | 200GB 7200RPM HDD | 6GB RAM (see here)
    PowerBook G4 12" | 1.33GHZ | 160GB 5400RPM HDD | 768MB RAM
    (also a g3 lombard, g3 wallstreet pictureframe, 3400, 180c, 160)

  19. #59

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    517

    Default

    Have you got the Developer tools installed? Want to try the following?

    Save the following as "hugemem.c"

    Code:
    #include <stdio.h>
    #include <stdlib.h>
    
    #define HOWMUCH (unsigned long)(1024L * 1024L * 1024L * 4L)
    
    int  main (int argc, char *argv[]) {
      char *myMemory;
      char *myPointer;
      long long counter;
      char temp[8];
    
      myMemory = malloc (HOWMUCH);
      if (myMemory == NULL) {
        fprintf (stderr, "failed to allocate %llu bytes of memory\n", HOWMUCH);
        return (1);
      } else {
        if (mlock (myMemory, HOWMUCH) == 0) {
          fprintf (stdout, "locked %llu bytes of memory\n", HOWMUCH);
          myPointer = myMemory;
          for (counter = 0; counter < HOWMUCH; counter++) {
            *myPointer = 'a';
            myPointer++;
          }
          fprintf (stdout, "set %llu bytes of memory to 'a'\n", HOWMUCH);
          fprintf (stdout, "Press Ctrl + D to quit\n");
          fscanf (stdin, "%s", temp);
          munlock (myMemory, HOWMUCH);
        } else {
          fprintf (stdout, "failed to lock memory\n");
        }
        free (myMemory);
      }
      return (0);
    }
    Compile it with "gcc -m64 -o hugemem hugemem.c"

    Then run "./hugemem"

    It will attempt to allocate 4GB of non-pageable memory and then set it all to 'a', try not to have anything else running at the same time. Watch the RSIZE column in Activity Monitor.

  20. #60

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,599

    Default

    Interesting.

    I have one of the MBPs that is listed as being limited to 3GB of RAM. When I installed 2x2GB it recognised the full 4GB but after a couple of days everything became noticeably slower. Dropped it down to 3GB and everything has since been awesomely fast. Thus my experience reflects Jedda's suggestion. Of course the newer MBPs might not be the same specs as listed in the system profiler - Apple has pulled a fast one on this front before...
    Trading Feedback: El Guardo

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •